How one atheist sees life

What _IS_ Injustice?

Without any introduction, please view this video

The reason that there are more male over-achievers is the same reason that there are more male serial killers. Men will excel at something, mediocre is not the thing men do. There can be and are many reasons for this situation. Men do not follow the bell curve in most comparisons. They generally fall at one end or the other, not in the middle. There is a reason for this and I’m not going to tell you what it is. I want you to think about it. I want you to think about all the men that find themselves not in the top 10% and what they must contend with in life. Even as I strive to be a renaissance man of sorts I know that I’m not on the very high end and not at the low end. I’ve known this for a long time. I’m above average but for men – this doesn’t count. I’m not Alexander the Great and I’m not Jack the Ripper. I’m nobody. The world doesn’t hate me and the world doesn’t love me. The world doesn’t care about me. As a man that leaves me with few choices and a big tax burden. I was born this way. Born screwed. I’m fortunate enough to have gone to school before the horrors described in this video. Still, life is what it is and I have to live with it. I won’t get special treatment. I won’t get special dispensation. I won’t get anything that I don’t earn or steal myself. I think that society has forgotten this about our culture. We’ve focussed on the wrong things for too long. Now more innocents get to pay for other people’s mistakes and greed.

MAL,
Well said. Yet, you are forgetting that your perspective is not at all of great significance in correlation to mine. As an individual, my perspective, my reality, is of much more value to me than your “above average” opinions (of course unless I choose otherwise).
Being the strong, independent woman I am…well I really just don’t give a fuck about everyone’s outlook, perhaps too barren or too outlandish. So to see yourself as screwed due to your “nobody” status could very well be true, especially given such a compelling argument on your end. However my perception is quite antipodal in comparison to yours. You are in the top 1% of men in my life. [Granted I don’t have many friends, but a fact is a fact] You are almost superior to all other men that I’ve ever known, been graced by and know today. This is reality…not an opinion.
I guess you can argue that your perception of my perception is still above average because it is of course your perception.
But still, reality over here sits at a different table than yours, and perhaps that is because you are of a greater status.
MAL, you might contend with a lot, a lot more than I will ever know. But in the eyes of this woman, your struggles become my revelations, your grapples with life allow me to see things more clearly, and the reasons for your constant coping boils my blood to a temperature where I am able to coagulate into a more familiar identity with you…permitting me to enjoy your every truthful idea and thought.
To me, your personal thought status holds no significance in my eyes. None, nil, zilch. The reality of your life position in my life is high, higher than my own in many ways regards. You are amongst the most influential people in my life one of them being my dearest deity.
So yes in eyes of society you might be small or even non-existent…but aren’t I society? Do I not count? And how could you decipher your status based off of society alone….whelp, I guess that’s reality.
Just never forget about mine.

I watched the first five minutes of the video and could not proceed because it how slight differences are generalized has always been the way massive discrimination has been justified.

Consider:

We have, say, 100 boys all age 10, and time how long it takes each to run 100 meters. We can do all kinds of stuff with this information. Let’s say we divide the runners by ‘whites’ and ‘blacks’ by plotting dots to represent times that vary between, say, about 12 seconds and 20 for each ‘group’. We then compare the times and find there is a slight difference in the median. The ‘average’ time for ‘whites’ if 14.3 seconds whereas the median time for ‘blacks’ is 14.2 seconds.

What does this mean?

Well, using the language of the speaker in the video, it means ‘blacks’ run faster than ‘whites’ and so we should alter our education system to reflect this ‘fact’.

Is this true?

Well, when we look at our comparison chart, we find that 50% of ‘whites’ actually run fast than 49% of ‘blacks’, That, too, is a fact based on the same data. Does it make sense to then announce to these kids that ‘blacks’ run faster than ‘whites’ based on a slighter different median run time versus the reality that on this arbitrary group selection basis (whites and blacks) there is only a slight median difference? Does it really justify the claim that there is some genetic difference in running ability between these kids?

No. There isn’t. The differences may be for other reasons… because of that sample, because of that particular distance, because of that local population, because of social and economic differences, because of . The discrepancy, let’s remember, is actually quite slight on average but may be exaggerated at elite levels… again for reasons other than genetics.

The same is true in academics and gender. Why select on this group identifier rather than, say, height or average sleeping time, or dental health?

There is always a way to find group differences and always a way to find reasons to act on these. But each of us is not a ‘group’. Each of us are individuals with individual abilities that rank us higher here in this category but lower there in that category. The thinking mistake far too many people make is to assume is that individuals derive their abilities from these group identities. Hey, that’s the bread and butter of Sociology (and why I tend to think it is one of the most disreputable academic faculties ever admitted to higher ‘education’). That’s exactly backwards thinking… a way of thinking we find far too frequently driving conservative policies. Individuals make up these ‘groups’ only so far as the groups are selected on someone’s specific category. It is the ‘group’ that is the fiction and designing education policy on such fictions is the full time job of those who have an agenda other than what’s most enriching for individuals.

A simple comparison is with flocks of birds. They may be formed into something that looks like a single and discrete thing acting in a way puzzling to most observers but they are flock only so far as the individual birds that make them up… local units obeying local rules. And we learn nothing about these individuals by first assuming that the flock defines them.

No but the summary sounds about right. Stigma from Hollywood, fatherless homes, no heroes but sports and on and on … Causes problems. Verdict is in but we still ingest round-up etc. There are 100s of causes working together. I try to help neighborhood boys learn about guy things when I can. Many of the older boys are mgtow and don’t even know what that is. Few of them have life goals. This sort of thing is why the military was good for men and why sports can be but there are few options for success for boys. Few people showing them good examples and so on. What they need is fight club. Well it often seems that way to me.